"JFK: Shots in Dallas" Movie Review Essay & Film Analysis

Oliver Stone has never been apolitical director. Always indifferent to what happened and is happening in the world, he took a lot of pictures, in which he tried to figure out the most controversial, sometimes covered with a thick curtain of fog, stories. And, of course, 'shots in Dallas' - one of the most controversial and exposing his pictures, and not just because their own real events still excite the minds of millions, but also because Stone masterfully gives a bunch of different it assumptions, collecting a puzzle of hundreds of small, but have the makings of a logic slices, thereby denouncing the greatest political power system. As they say - he hits the nail on the head. Yes, it is now much of what is broadcast in the movie, not a revelation, but it is impossible not to admire the way in a good obsessive filmmaker comes to painting, thereby infecting this obsession with the whole cast, whose recognition does not prevent to believe the veracity of their characters. Giving the impression that looks interesting documentary chronicle rather than a feature film since kinematgrafichnost here was given as a sacrifice uncompromising realism.
Ribbon Stone not only literally in seconds recreates the events of that fateful day of 1963, when America and the whole world, shocked the cold-blooded assassination of President Kennedy, but also shows a remarkable investigation into the District Attorney Jim Garrison, felt in all this a real political plot to the coup, in the background desires the first person of the country to deviate from the course - to leave Vietnam and try to end the Cold War with the Soviet Union. Harrison and his team follow in the footsteps of, unfortunately, held the assassination attempt, plunging into the perilous whirlpool of public intrigue, conspiracies, a series of murders and mysteries. Embodied as a prosecutor for the first time too partial and moving into his role as Kevin Costner, perfectly conveys all the inner desire Harrison did not just get to the truth to raise their own self-esteem, and to convey to the people the fact that they severely controlled from the top, giving no rights to freedom and that democracy is actually if there is, it is only in words. And, finally, that the desire to keep the constructed system up there is so great that they are willing to write and implement any scenario, and anyone who gets in the way of their endless ambition, whether president or protecting the rights of African American preacher Martin Luther King, waiting for is the real extermination. Is Harrison right? If he possessed in his revelations? After seeing a picture of the viewer is given a chance to clear up a lot myself.
And here is not so important which of the many versions of the most accurate. Doubt that Kennedy's assassination was orchestrated tip, but not implemented by any one person, just can not be, but the facts in favor of this abound, even despite the fact that most of the documents can be made public not soon, if ever, ever It will be fully unveiled. Despite the huge timing, tape every hour of viewing is getting more interesting. We constantly throw up new and new theories and assumptions, gradually discarding of them are unnecessary and the output will get something obvious. Despite the fact that in some episodes Stone literally states, and does not imply, deftly throwing the audience, for example, the results of the examination the president of the body of the murdered, that might not have as much damage in different parts of the body by means of two or three bullets that says more the number of shots and hits, as well as not one sniper, the director still gives the opportunity came to the session to look at things from different angles, constantly moving the characters in the film as if on a chessboard and rechecking those passing sludge other moves. This is an incredibly exciting! Even taking into account any omission, view pictures literally draws the viewer into its intricacies of narrative, never for a moment letting add-aside.
in 'Shots' assembled a galaxy of Hollywood stars of various ranks. Besides those already noted above Costner, here you can contemplate the wonderful transformation of Garry Oldman, superbly played the very Oswald, who heads the list of those who could have killed Kennedy, Tommy Lee Jones, in the form of an eccentric mobster supposedly state agent, Kevin Bacon, very thin and unusual example of the role of gay-prostituta, Joe Pesci, which somehow did not expect gay character with painted eyebrows and blonde wigs after many roles psychotic gangster and bandit in, well, and finally, Donald Sutherland, as always pathetically outstanding dialogues that are filled with depth and meaning. And I want to note once again that the actors are so caught up in their own way that their stardom does not prevent to perceive these in the context of their actual personalities enacted. The picture has a lot of documentary fragments, some of which baffle literally, and these frames are carefully mixed with art inserts removed in archive style. The downside is excessively swollen timing. No, the tape is the less exciting does not become, but much could apply more compact. Well, at least for the sake of dynamics. For the series, this approach would have fallen by the way - could well be possible to reveal, for example, the climax of the trial
P.S.. Who killed Kennedy? This question stirs minds of millions has been for more than 50 years. And tape Oliver Stone in my view respond to him very clearly and deployed. In fact, the US president killed system that has been built over, and that does not carry any compromises when it comes to her safety. In this case, it does not matter who fired the shot. The important thing is that on that day, not only encroached on the life of the first man of the country, but also to choose and the freedom of an entire people. And the people have the right to know the truth!
'All of us in our country have become Hamlet. Children killed by their fathers. And their killers are still sitting on the throne. '
9 out of 10

How to cite this essay: